CLAIM: Ed Perlmutter voted against the law that protects victims of child abuse from having to face their abusers in court.

This statement is true.

Perlmutter was one of three state senators who voted against this law in 1996.That law passed.

It allowed child abuse victims under the age of 12 to testify in court by closed circuit television.Perlmutter's campaign released a response saying he voted against the law before closed circuit television had proven itself in the courtroom.

They also say he believed it was unconstitutional, because the Colorado Bill of Rights required anyone accused of a crime to face their accuser.

Joe Coors' spokeswoman Michelle Yi said Perlmutter heard evidence in 1996 as a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee that closed circuit television was ruled constitutional.

He heard further evidence during a second reading of the bill the very next week, Yi said, the Colorado Supreme Court said it was constitutional.

Perlmutter, in a release, now says closed circuit TV in these types of court cases meets constitutional requirements.

CLAIM: Extreme Ed Perlmutter voted against Colorado's law allowing the use of DNA evidence to convict sexual predators years later.

There is no denying how Perlmutter voted as a State Senator in 2001. The ad's statement about the vote is true.

The law removed the 10-year statute of limitations for most sexual assault crimes when DNA evidence is involved.

Perlmutter's campaign says he voted against the bill because, "he believes it was poorly written and unconstitutional because of its retroactive clause."

"Ed is a father of three daughters.He absolutely has done so much for victims rights and for women's rights," Perlmutter's spokeswoman Leslie Oliver said. "He has a very strong record of backing safety and security, women and kids, and their health and their safety."

In a release, Perlmutter's campaign also pointed to a changed stance by the bill's co-sponsor in 2001, then State Rep. Cheri Jahn.

Now a Colorado State Senator, Jahn told 9NEWS she believes she would vote differently about the bill today.

"I'm not thrilled about it now," she said. "I was a victim advocate. I will always stand up for the victims, but again, do we violate the constitution?"

However, a 2011 Colorado court case, People vs. Hicks, upheld the law regarding the statute of limitations and prosecution using DNA evidence in many sex assault cases.

THE BOTTOM LINE:

Perlmutter did vote against the bills referenced by the ad. Whether Perlmutter's voting record justifies the "extreme" label is a matter of opinion.